Method and apparatus for planning and monitoring multiple tasks based on user defined criteria and predictive ability

ABSTRACT

Individual employees are permitted to be individuals and plan their work as individuals. Individuals are only asked to plan their work within a limited tasking horizon. Employees track their progress using verbs that are designed to capture the reasons behind positive and negative predictive ability. Verbs are analyzed and expected predictive error, also know as risk, is calculated. Once verbs are captured they can be analyzed for ways to improve predictive ability. In addition, the risk can be factored into the initial planning stage so as to include an expected predictive error in the initial planning.

I. FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to an improved method and apparatus forplanning and monitoring the assignment and completion of a project thatis comprised of an aggregate of tasks.

II. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND

A project typically requires a large amount of time and involves manyindividuals from different disciplines and professions. Project orientedtasks typically have more uncertainty and fluidity than other types ofwork, such as repetitive tasks performed with functionally orientedwork. As a result, specialized methodology and tools for managingprojects have been needed.

Large companies typically utilize programmable computers and associateddatabases to manage available personnel and track expended labor hours.Various internal and external funding accounts may exist to whichpersonnel may charge their labor time. Because large companies areunable to track and predict the work habits of individual employees,they track macro indicators such as total cost and total time. Planningon a macro level is never accurate and never identifies the reasons forthe inaccuracies so as to permit the planning model to be refined.

Common examples of macro models include tracking work performed incompleting a capital project so that it can be depreciated for taxpurposes. Accordingly, a specific Capital Project Appropriation Request(CPAR) is created to which personnel may charge expended time inperforming work thereunder.

One conventional system is known as the Automated Issue ManagementSystem (AIMS) and is used in conjunction with another conventionalsystem called Time Entry System (TES) which are used for capitalizinginternal and external labor. The systems are contained in conventionalprogrammable computers for more accurately managing the large number ofpersonnel involved and the substantial number of individual tasksassociated with various capital projects. A project manager typicallyinitiates a project by opening a specific work request in the AIMSsystem. The system automatically provides a respective AIMS number,which typically has a correlation to a single CPAR number. The managerassigns personnel to complete tasks based on an AIMS number. The TESsystem allows personnel to record through a personal computer expendedtime per AIMS number as the work is completed. The TES system allows themanager to examine cumulative time expended for specific AIMS numbers,with the manager manually correlating the AIMS number to a specificCPAR.

Although the AIMS and TES systems facilitate managing projects in alarge company, project planning and managing is nevertheless relativelycomplex in most circumstances. To further facilitate project managementin large companies, commercially available software has been developed.One available management tool or product is conventionally known asMicrosoft Project from Microsoft Corp., and another product is ABTProject Workbench from the Applied Business Technology Corporation.These software tools allow companies to define project plans inaccordance with tasks and time schedules for available personnelresources, and are typically operated in stand-alone fashion or inconjunction with other commercially available software products forfacilitating the overall management of projects. However, thesecommercially available products are designed for specific applicationsand are therefore limited in capability, as well as having no built incapability for managing project funding such as the CPAR exampleintroduced above.

An example of previously disclosed systems include U.S. Pat. No.5,111,391, which describes a staff scheduling data processing system andmethod schedules staff and management personnel at locations remote froma central location by applying central location policy to unique remotelocation data to insure the optimum staff schedule for each remote site.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,818,715 describes a method and system for modifying aproject model in response to an update.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,767,848 describes a development support system forsupporting new product development activities, which includes a targetstorage for storing target values of schedules of product development,and the cost and the performance of the product; an estimating unit forestimating schedules of product development and the cost and theperformance of the product on the basis of the models stored in themodel storage. The '848 patent includes a unit for monitoring electronicmail necessary for carrying out tasks essential to the development ofthe product, extracting information relating to the progress of tasksessential to carrying out the development of the product, and providingthe members of the development project team with information about theprogress of the tasks.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,765,140 describes a dynamic project management systemincludes a server network and a master database.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,692,125 describes a scheduling system, events and/orgroups of events are checked at a scheduling time to insure that certainfixed conditions associated with the event(s) are satisfied.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,942,527 describes a computing apparatus for an improvedinformation system that manages.

All of these proposed systems, however, fail to adequately includefactors necessary for adequate task planning and are incapable ofefficiently and accurately planning and managing project tasks. All ofthese systems are based on the premise that planning is dependent uponmacro attributes, such as time and cost. In tying planning to thesemacro attributes that are used regardless of the employee base andregardless of the planning model, these systems are inherently limitedand fail to account for the way people actually work.

III. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is designed to evaluate the entire workflowprocess for human factors on both macro and micro levels. The presentinvention breaks down projects into micro events and tracks the group'spredictive ability (the ability to plan and carry out tasks as planned).

The present system recognizes that certain factors that effect planningand management are incapable of being quantified on a macro level andmust be incorporated into the planning process on a micro level. Thepresent system recognizes that the best knowledge of how productive orefficient an individual employee will be over a given time period islikely to rest with that individual employee.

Not every individual is able to predict or schedule work with the samedegree of accuracy. The accuracy of an entire group to plan and executeon that plan is only as good as the weakest link. The present inventionrecognizes this and provides a system and method that uses tasks anduser defined goals to measure predictive ability. As individualpredictive ability is optimized, the group's predictive ability is alsooptimized. This permits projects to be planned and executed with thegreatest degree of planning accuracy.

Thus, the present system has several stages. Individual employees arepermitted to be individuals and plan their work as individuals.Individuals are only asked to plan their work within a limited taskinghorizon. Employees track their progress using verbs that are designed tocapture the reasons behind positive and negative predictive ability.Verbs are analyzed and expected predictive error, also know as risk, iscalculated. Once verbs are captured they can be analyzed for ways toimprove predictive ability. In addition, the risk can be factored intothe initial planning stage so as to include an expected predictive errorin the initial planning. Tasks may also be analyzed and linked to othertasks to account for inherent related task risk.

In general, the present invention breaks projects down into individualassignable tasks. Tasks are assigned for a predetermined time, up to thetasking horizon, by an employer or project manager. The tasking horizonis designed to be a realistic planning window that corresponds to thelength of time most employees can plan their work. In one example, thetasking horizon is a two-week period. It may also be a week, days ormonths. Depending on the tasks, workers and work environment, thetasking horizon may vary.

Next, verbs are selected that capture the types of dialogues that anemployee faced with the task may use to describe their progress. Verbsare meant to capture generalized categories of dialogue that workerswould routinely engage in if they were each interviewed on a routinebasis throughout a project. For example, verbs may be selected toprovide s series of potential answers to a standard question, such as“why do you think you performed this task faster or slower thanestimated?” In one embodiment, verbs can be broken down into employeedependent verbs (health, mental well being, etc.), task related verbs(new computers not working, etc.), environmental verbs (snow, etc.) orin any number of ways. Verbs are used to categorize and classifyemployee responses to assist in maximizing predictive ability.

Each employee is provided with access to a task assignment station or aPC. The task assignment station provides the employee with knowledgeabout their tasks that need to be scheduled, started or completed duringthe next tasking horizon. The database does not set a time period inwhich each task is to be completed but allows the employee to instructthe system when, and in what order, the employee thinks that a task willbe started and finished. As the system works by maximizing theemployee's predictive ability, it is preferable that the employee hassome control over the scheduling of tasks. As employees perform tasksthey access the database to record when a task is started and when it iscompleted.

In addition, the task assignment station is provided with the list ofverbs to select from that best describe the reason the task wascompleted before or after the employee predicted. An employee's abilityto accurately predict when a task is completed, or not, is referred toas churn. Thus, churn is a measure of the employee's predictive ability.An employee that starts work when expected and finishes when expectedwill have a low churn.

One goal of the present invention is to have each employee accuratelypredict when tasks will be completed. This information is invaluable inaccurately predicting and planning projects. When individual predictiveability is optimized, the group benefits and is able to accuratelypredict and plan projects.

Because the present invention is based on employee input, it has theadvantage of gathering unique data on the way employees work. Becausethe system has access to employee verbs, it can also be used to identifymanagement issues, such as the need for training that will assist theemployer in minimizing future churn. The present system also assists inidentifying natural work patterns of employees and accounts for the wayemployees actually work when planning projects.

Because the present invention is a dynamic system, rather than a static(cost and time) system, the traditional vocabulary that has been used inmanagement systems is insufficient. Thus, in the present invention thefollowing terms have definitions other than their tradition definition.They are as follows:

Term Definition Churn The movement of tasks in relation to the taskinghorizon. Horizon The farthest point in time in the future where amanager believes a task will be completed as planned (usually referredto as the tasking horizon.) Language Structured verbs, objects, projectphase definitions, and tasking horizons used to capture theTasking-Closure Dialogue. Management The practice of controlling anorganization through tools and process mirroring the way humans performtasks. Navigate Using structured task language and tasking horizons tocontrol the course of a project. Project An undertaking comprised ofphases and goals and performed by a team or teams. Task An item or workdecomposed to the lowest level possible.

IV. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing and other advantages and features of the invention willbecome more apparent from the detailed description of the preferredembodiments of the invention given below with reference to theaccompanying drawings in which:

FIG. 1 is a diagram of an on-site implementation of the current system;

FIG. 2 is a diagram of an off site implementation of the current system;

FIG. 3 is a schematic of an alternative database configuration;

FIG. 4 is a flow chart of the employer task assignment stage;

FIG. 5 is a flow chart of the task scheduling stage;

FIG. 6 is a flow chart of a churn management stage;

FIG. 7 is a flow chart of a predictive management stage;

FIG. 8 is a logic diagram of a task assignment stage interface;

FIG. 9 is a logic diagram of churn monitoring stage; and

FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of a predictive management system.

V. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS AND OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

The present system is designed to be dynamic and thus the hardwareneeded to implement it from embodiment to embodiment variesconsiderably.

The present invention can be run on an internal network as shown in FIG.1 or over an external network (including the Internet) as shown in FIG.2. Employees are connected to a network database 5 through the use of aPC at terminals 1, 2 and 3. A manager is also connected to the networkdatabase 5 through a PC at terminal 4. Those of ordinary skill in theart will understand that a PC with a Pentium processor, 16 megs of RAM,a 5 meg hard-drive, an operating system (such as Windows '95 or higher)and a 56 k modem or network connection are adequate to implement thepresent invention. In its most basic embodiment the entire system can beprovided on a single PC with a Pentium processor, 64 megs of RAM, a 5 GBhard-drive, an operating system (such as Windows NT or similar operatingsystem) that multiple user's have access to. Likewise, in a hardwiredembodiment, similar components maybe provided in a hardwired form.

Another implementation involves web server software running on a serverthat is used to produce an external network configuration. As shown inFIG. 2, an external network, such as the Internet 6, is provided. Aserver 7, such as a Netscape ES server is provided that is operationallyconnected to a workstation 8, such as a Sun Microsystems Workstation.The database 5 may be provided externally or internally to one or moreof the PCs or workstations.

The types of databases used may vary considerably. As shown in FIG. 3,the database 5 may have multiple sub-databases, which may be partitionedportions of database 5 or may be additional databases. The sub-databasesmay include a section to hold data associated with the present system 5a, employee human resource data 5 b and/or time and billing data 5 c.The multiple databases may be located at different locations and datamay be shared on a periodic basis or though other conventional means.

As the present invention is designed to operate dynamically, those ofordinary skill in the art will recognize that it may be installed over avariety of computing systems. For example, in addition to the singlenetwork system shown in FIG. 1, it is expressly contemplated thatmultiple networks and/or sub-networks may be incorporated and that thepresent invention may be implemented in whole or in part over all orover selected portions of the network. For example, the managementfunctions, such as assigning risk, may be implemented in an uppermanagement system, the task assignment may be implemented in an on-sitedirect management system and the employee planning system may beimplemented over an employee network.

Although the present invention is a dynamic system that is ultimatelydesigned to be recursive, the operation of the present invention is bestunderstood if one begins with the employer task assignment stage 10.When the multiple aspects of the present invention are described, thoseof ordinary skill in the art will recognize how the system works onitself to constantly refine and upgrade is predictive abilities.

The present invention works by recognizing that projects may beinterpreted as discrete tasks that must be completed during the project.Each task has a start and stop date and each task has an action itemassociated with it. In other words,$P = {\sum\limits_{n = 1}^{x}{T_{n}\left( {X,Y} \right)}}$where P is the project, T is each task, X is a start date and Y is acompletion date or time until completion.

In a more complicated embodiment, individual tasks may be linked. Thus,a task whose start date is linked to the stop date of another task maybe linked. Tasks may be linked directly, that is a task that cannot bestarted until another task is completed, or they may be linkedindirectly. An indirectly linked task may be related indirectly, such asa task in a different phase of the project, such that its start date islikely to be influenced by the stop date of tasks that in the precedingphase of the project. Linked tasks will be described more in detail inthe discussion below concerning risk.

As shown in FIG. 4, the project is input 12 and the tasks separated out14. The process of task separation may be automated or may be carriedout by an operator. As the recursive nature of the present invention isappreciated, the tasks or types of tasks likely to be in a project maybe automatically determined in the task breakdown step 14. The presentsystem can record projects and tasks and provide that information as adefault when a new project is initiated.

Once the tasks in a project have been determined, the next aspect of thepresent invention is the planning of the tasks. The project as a wholewill have an ultimate start and stop date. The project start and stopdates are the ultimate time window in which the individual tasks must becompleted. The present invention recognizes that the most effectiveplanning is generally limited to a predetermined period of time, whichis likely to be much smaller than the project time period. Thus, fortask planning purposes the project is broken down into a tasking horizon16. The tasking horizon is designed to be a realistic window of timeover which tasks can be scheduled. In a preferred embodiment, the taskhorizon is one or two weeks, but it may be a number of days, weeks oreven months depending on the tasks being assigned and the group beingassigned the tasks.

If the project window is represented by X_(t), where t=1 to Z, thetasking window (W) may be represented as a function of X_(t) toX_(t+10), assuming that t is measured in days and there are 5 days in awork week. The tasks can thus be sorted as a function of time (t) andscheduled accordingly.${P\left( X_{t} \right)} = {\sum\limits_{n = 1}^{x}{{W\left( {X_{t},X_{t + 10}} \right)}{T_{n}\left( {X_{t},Y} \right)}}}$

It is important to note that in a multi-tiered implementation of thepresent invention the tasks may be assigned to groups, which may thenassign the tasks to individual employees or groups. Thus, it isexpressly contemplated that in some implementations there will bemultiple tiers of task assignments. In such multi-tiered implementationsit is expressly contemplated that different groups or sub-groups mayhave different tasking horizons.

It is also expressly contemplated that the start date of a task maydepend in whole or in part on the stop date of another task. Thus, thepresent invention permits tasks to be linked or to be assigned with arisk factor, which will be described in more detail below.

The next step is to assign verbs (V) 18 to each task.${P\left( X_{t} \right)} = {\sum\limits_{n = 1}^{x}{{W\left( {X_{t},X_{t + 10}} \right)}{T_{n}\left( {X_{t},Y,V_{set}} \right)}}}$Verbs are designed to capture the types of dialogue that a worker woulduse to explain why a task was or was not started and/or completed asplanned. Verbs may be assigned for all tasks on a project or may changefrom task to task. By requiring the employee to select a verb, theemployee/employer dialogue is standardized so that it is capable ofanalysis.

In a preferred embodiment it is contemplated that there will be multipleverb sets that the task assignor can simply select. In one embodiment, averb set is provided that is task independent and includes verbs thatare assigned to a task regardless of what that task may be. Other verbsets may be task dependent. A third set of verbs may be provided thatare employee specific. Employee specific verbs may be based on anemployee's HR data and include verbs that relate to children, medicalconditions, etc. Any or all of these verb sets may be used and thepresent invention is not limited to any one verb set.

Some examples of verbs may include the following groups:

Task based Employee based Employee Specific Harder than expected HealthChildren sick Easier than expected Too much work Family emergencyTraining needed Too little work Tired/NBA finals New equipment BoredAsthma acting up

The final step is to assign the tasks 20 that occur during the taskinghorizon.

The assignment of tasks can be implemented on a periodic basis or may beassigned at the beginning of the project for automatic assignmentsduring the appropriate tasking horizon. Each day, or at set intervals,the system may check the unassigned tasks and assigns tasks that fallwithin the next tasking horizon.

It is also expressly contemplated that tasks may be self-assigned. Atwhich point verb sets may be selected from a predetermined verb set ormay be subsequently assigned by an employer.

As shown in FIG. 5 after a task has been assigned, the task needs to bescheduled 22, 24. Scheduling is accomplished by having the employee, orin some embodiments the employer, assign start and stop dates 26.Although the present invention is described with respect to start andstop dates, those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that theinvention may be implemented using a start date and a number of workinghours or in any other time and work measurement system, such as a startdate and cost. The start and stop dates set the standard against whichthe scheduler's planning abilities are measured. It is also expresslycontemplated that a default start and stop date may be provided with thetask that the employee may modify.

The next step is for the employee to record the task performance 28. Itis preferable that task performance is recorded on a daily basis. Inaddition to indicating a task is started or completed, the employee isasked to select a verb 30 associated with the action (starting and/orstopping) that best describes why the task was or was not started and/orcompleted as predicted. The differences between the planned start andstop dates and the actual start and/or stop dates is classified as churn(C).C=T(X _(prescribed) , Y _(predicted))−T(X _(actual) ,Y _(actual))The verb is used to classify the reasons for churn, or in other wordsthe reason for why the task was performed as planned or not performed asplanned. Churn may be broken down into start churn, completion churn,time churn, cost churn or any other variety. Churn is simply a measureof the relative predictive ability of the employee in relationship toone or more tasks. Churn may be a composite figure or an index of oneparticular type of ability.

In a preferred embodiment, the churn capturing process is triggered whentask dates appear, vanish, and/or move into or out of a current taskinghorizon (sometimes). The task edit interfaces (employee side interface)contain data entry fields for estimated start and completion, as well asactual start and completion dates for a particular task. Depending onthe case, any and/or all of the aforementioned date values may changeduring a single transaction. Therefore, a set of rules is necessary togovern date entry, as well as rules to govern which date change orchanges should generate churn.

An example of date rules is as follows:

-   -   An estimated date cannot be changed if an accompanying actual        date exists.    -   If an actual date is created and the accompanying estimated date        does not exist, it is automatically populated with the value of        the actual date.    -   Complete dates may not precede start dates of the same type.

If changes to date fields are valid, then a determination is madewhether churn should be generated using churn rules.

Due to the nature of churn and data entry variables involved, churngeneration does not have to be limited to a single formula. Rather,churn may be generated based on a series of decisions using informationprovided by the application user. Churn is captured for all eventswithin a single transaction that meet churn generation requirements.

One example of the general preprocessing of churn is as follows:

-   -   If a date changes but does not enter or exit the current tasking        horizon, then churn is not generated for the date.    -   If no start and/or completion date values exist for a task, then        new estimated dates are always processed before new actual        dates. This is based on the date rule that estimated dates        cannot change while accompanying actual dates exists. In other        words, if the actual date is processed first, then processing        the change to the estimated date afterwards would violate the        date rule.    -   If an actual date vanishes and its accompanying estimated date        appears or is moved into or out of the current tasking horizon,        then again, the estimated date is processed after the actual        date.

Based on these churn preprocessing rules, an example of churn generationrules is as follows:

-   -   If an estimated date is created in or moved into the current        tasking horizon, then negative churn is generated.    -   If an estimated date is deleted or moved out of the current        tasking horizon, positive churn is generated.    -   If an estimated date exists in the current tasking horizon, and        an actual date is moved out of, or is created outside of the        current tasking horizon, then positive churn is generated.    -   If an actual date is deleted or is moved out of the current        tasking horizon and the accompanying estimated date is not in        the current tasking horizon, then positive churn is generated.    -   If an actual date is created in or is moved into the current        tasking horizon and the accompanying estimated date is not in        the current tasking horizon, then negative churn is generated.

Churn percentages can thus be calculated as follows:

-   -   Project Churn Rate=100*DCT/TT    -   Negative Churn Rate=100*DCN/TT    -   Positive Churn Rate=100*DCP/TT        where DCT is equal to the distinct churning tasks in project,        DCN is equal to the distinct tasks in project that churned        negatively, DCP is equal to the distinct tasks in project that        churned positively and TT is equal to the number of tasks in        project.

An example of a churn calculation can be understood from the followingexample. If 100 tasks exist in the current tasking horizon, 5 unplannedtasks are introduced into the current tasking horizon and 10 tasks slipto the next tasking horizon, the positive churn is 10%, the negativechurn is 5% and the total churn is 7.5%.

Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that there are manydifferent churn scenarios and that the above example is one of manyalternatives.

It is expressly contemplated that an optional employee schedulingmonitoring module may be used that keeps track of the time between taskscheduling updates. If an employee does not update task performancewithin periodic periods of time, for example weekly, a reminder to theemployee to update his/her tasks can be sent by the module.

One example of a logic diagram for an employee side interface 52 isshown in FIG. 8. This embodiment is designed for use over a networksystem that is preferably implemented over the Internet and uses adistributed object architecture system, such as CORBA, JAVA or JAVABEANS. Those of ordinary skill of the art will recognize that theinterface may be modified and implemented over a wide variety ofsystems.

The employee first logs in through a conventional login 54 andauthentication 56 routine. After login, the employee may select theviews or items to be displayed 58. If the churn rate is requested 60,the most currently available churn data is retrieved 62 and displayed64. Depending on the type of churn being calculated (task based,employee based and/or environmentally based), multiple churn rates maybe displayed. It is expressly contemplated that churn may be displayednumerically, graphically or in any other conventional means.

If the employee chooses to view tasks 80, the system retrieves the tasksassigned to that employee 66 and displays them 68. If the task is new70, the employee is provided with the ability to set the anticipatedstart and stop date 78. If the tasks is an existing tasks 74, theemployee may update their progress 72 on any of the tasks 74. Inaddition, for each task that receives a data input, the employee isrequested to enter a verb and/or to select a verb from a predeterminedlist. The logic diagram is ended at 81.

Determining why tasks are not performed as planned is one of the goalsof the present invention. When tasks are not performed as planned theyare classified as churn. The verbs that are associated with the reasonfor the churn can then be analyzed to determine what if anything theemployer can do to either minimize the churn or anticipate itsoccurrence.

In one embodiment as shown in FIG. 6, a churn management program 32 isactively connected to the employee task data. Task progress is monitoredagainst the employee's scheduled progress 34. Discrepancies in progressare classified as churn. Churn is calculated 36 and may be eitherpositive or negative. Both positive and negative churn represent afailure of the planning period to accurately predict what actions wouldoccur.

Churn can be analyzed on many different levels. Churn may be calculatedby task, by task type, by employee, by groups of employees, etc. Churnis monitored on multiple levels to help identify why the churn occurred.Churn helps identify what an employer can do to reduce churn and alsohelps the employer recognize what churn it will never be able to reduce.By quantifying churn, the employer may optimize the working environmentwhile at the same time quantifying the intangible variable that forcetasks and projects to be completed in a manner other than what waspredicted.

When churn is encountered, it is important to know if the reason 38 forthe churn and whether it has anything to do with the task itself or theindividual who performed the task. The verb associated with the positivechurn rate is analyzed to determine what if any effect it should have onan assigned risk factor 40.

Risk factors may be churn dependent or they may be task dependent. Riskfactors can be assigned as a function of the predicted length of aproject or can be factored as percentage of error or both. For example,an “installing” task may take, on average, 5 working days to complete.An employee that predicts the task can be completed in 4 days will havea risk of 1 day assigned to the task. Alternately, the employee or taskcan be calculated to take 25% longer than planned. Thus, an employeethat schedules the “install” for 4 days may be assigned a 1 day (25%×4days) risk factor.

In addition, a task such as “programming” may not be able to be starteduntil the “installing” task is completed. A risk factor may be assignedto the “programming” start date that is a function of the on-timecompletion risk associated with the “installing” task. The riskassociated with multiple tasks may be quantified and assigned a weightthat reflects the influence of the related task. Thus, for example ifthere is a 25% chance that the “installing” step may not be completed asplanned and the “installing” task has a direct effect on the“programming task, a 100% weight, the risk associated with the“installing” task will be attributed to the “programming task.”

The verbs associated with the churn are important is assigning task riskvalues and in deciding whether there is anything that an employer can doto minimize the churn. For example, if the same worker takes 6 days todo an “install” but identifies a family emergency (personal reason) forthe delay, the risk factor assigned to the task may not be modified atall. The reason for the churn is employee based and not task based. Theemployee's risk factor may also only be effected if the incident rate offamily emergencies experienced by the worker exceeds some predeterminednorm. Thus, if the employee experiences a 10% greater likelihood ofhaving personal emergencies and on average workers schedules areeffected by personal emergencies in 10% of the tasks that are performed,the worker may have a 1% increased risk factor (10% additional risk of a10% norm) of incurring churn. If the worker's churn is 1 day and therisk factor is 1%, the worker may have a 0.01 day increased risk.

On the other hand, if the same employee identifies training as thereason for the churn, the employer may weigh the cost benefit oftraining and the possible increase in productivity. Thus, the presentsystem permits tangible and intangible risk to be calculated and normsdetermined by using verbs that are not attributable to any givenpersonal reason.

Because the present invention mirrors how people actually work, it mayuse Human Resource (HR) data to assist in predicting likely workpatterns. In an alternate embodiment, the churn and risk assessment ismade in combination with the employee's human resource data and/or anyother data that the employee is willing to share. Events, hobbies,children, family obligations as well as other significant events thatcan be quantified can be worked into the churn/risk calculation. Anemployee's risk may fluctuate in relation to trackable events andassigned accordingly. For example, a risk factor may increase ordecrease for an employee with children during known vacation periods.When children are home during vacations, depending on the familysituation, the employee's risk value may increase or decrease. Thus, ifan employee's personal profile indicates that they have children, thechildren's vacation can automatically be factored into the churn/riskcalculations. Likewise, other commitments, whether the employee is on asport's team or predictable event, such as vacation, can be used toidentify churn patterns and optimize risk calculations. The net effectof this type of risk analysis is that the employer can capture theintangible reasons for churn and make realistic decisions about how longtasks will take.

Another important advantage of the system is in identifying employeeswith below average intangible churn. Employee's who work equally hardregardless of other commitments or events. The employer may use riskmanagement to ensure that employee's do not overwork themselves and takeappropriate time off.

One example of a churn monitoring program 84 is shown in FIG. 9. Thisembodiment is designed for use over a network system that is preferablyimplemented over the Internet and uses a distributed object architecturesystem, such as CORBA, JAVA or JAVA BEANS. Those of ordinary skill ofthe art will recognize that the interface may be modified andimplemented over a wide variety of systems.

Tasks are first extracted 86 and the associated churn and verbs aredetermined 88. The churn is classified as positive or negative 90. Theverb, reason for the churn, is then analyzed 92. If verb categories areused, the verb can first be compared to the known employee dependentverbs 94. If the verb is employee based, in other words unique to thatemployee, the verb is compared to an expected norm value and a riskfactor is assigned 96. The risk factor is recorded in a database 98 and,if necessary, an overall risk factor is modified 100 for the employee.If the churn is not employee dependent 94, the churn is next analyzed todetermine if it is task related 102. If the churn is task related thechurn is compared to a norm and assigned a weight 110 and theinformation is recorded 112. Likewise, the overall risk factorassociated with that task may be modified 114. If the churn is notrelated to the employee or a particular task, it is classified asenvironmentally related 104. The churn is recorded 106 and the overallenvironmental risk factor associated with environmental related churn ismodified 108. If another task/churn requires analyzing 115, it is sentthrough the same process until the program ends 116.

One of the main goals of the present system is to assist in the planningstage, before tasks are assigned. Therefor, a predictive managementsystem 42, as shown in FIG. 7, is designed to assist in identifying howlong a project, composed of multiple tasks, will take and predict therisk (unexpected time variations) involved with the project.

The predictive management system 42 works by attempting to find as manydata points that can be correlated with known data. The first step is toinput tasks 44 and any information concerning the employee base 46 thatis available. The verbs that correspond with expected tasks may also bedesignated 48.

The predictive management system then looks for direct and indirectmatches amongst the data and compiles the risk 50. For example, if oneor more employees have performed a task that is part of the project, thetime period that the task will likely take to perform can be estimated.If direct task matches are not possible, the system can nevertheless useemployee based risk and/or environmental risk to estimate the non-taskdependent risk that the project is likely to encounter. The system canalso compare employee bases and extrapolate predictive information.Graphing of risk factors can also be used to extrapolate risk factortrends that are otherwise not captured by the current system.

Risk may be calculated for a project as a whole, for given time periodsor for given tasks. This permits the employer with general predictiveinformation and the ability to identify the most likely place in aproject where it will have the greatest likelihood of encounteringproblems. Staffing decisions and realistic goals can thus be set bymanagement before tasks are assigned to groups or individual employees.

Another example of a predictive management system, which may also bereferred to as a profiler, involves the creation of a template for a newproject, team, person, etc. based on statistical information that hasbeen gathered in the past.

One example of a predictive management center 118 is shown in FIG. 10.Tasks are identified 120 along with available employees 122 and theenvironment 124. Each employee's risk profile is extracted 126 from adatabase. Next, the tasks that will need to be completed are comparedagainst the tasks that the employee's have performed in the past 128.Environmental and employee personal risk is added at step 130 and anaverage time for each task is computed together with a composite riskfactor 132. Tasks that do not have a direct match 134 are identified andeither an estimation is made by the operator how long each task shouldtake to complete 136. Employee and environmental risk factors are added,together with the operator's new task predictive risk factor 138. Atotal completion time and project risk factor is then generated 140.

The present system may estimate the likely employee planning valuesusing a Fibonacci sequence. For a system size environment the formulais:S=CK ^(1/3) T ^(4/3)For development efforts the formula is:$\frac{0.4\left( \frac{S}{C} \right)^{3}}{T^{4}}$where S is the system size, C is the technology constant, K is the totaleffort and T is the development time. Those of ordinary skill in the artwill recognize that other well known methods of data analysis andpattern recognition, such as Least-Square Estimation, Best LinearUnbiased Estimation, Maximum-Likelihood Estimation, Mean-Squareestimation, Maximum A Posteriori Estimation, Wiener Filtering, KalmanFiltering, Iterated Squares, Extended Kalman Filtering, etc., may beused with the present invention.

Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that this is wherethe system begins to turn on itself and becomes recursive. As predictiveability is captured it can be anticipated and improved.

While the invention has been described in detail in connection with thepreferred embodiments known at the time, it should be readily understoodthat the invention is not limited to such disclosed embodiments. Rather,the invention can be modified to incorporate any number of variations,alterations, substitutions or equivalent arrangements not heretoforedescribed, but which are commensurate with the spirit and scope of theinvention. Accordingly, the invention is not to be seen as limited bythe foregoing description, but is only limited by the scope of theappended claims.

1. A method for modeling multiple tasks for multiple users comprisingthe steps of: breaking a project into said multiple tasks; activating acurrent tasking horizon, said tasking horizon comprising one of aplurality of time frames over which said multiple tasks can becompleted; selecting a language for at least one of said multiple tasks;receiving an actual date for said at least one of said multiple tasks;receiving an estimated date for said at least one task; calculating afirst negative churn if said received estimated date is created in ormoved into said current tasking horizon; calculating a first positivechurn if said received estimated date is deleted or moved out of saidcurrent tasking horizon; calculating a second positive churn if saidreceived estimated date exists in said current tasking horizon and saidreceived actual date is moved out of or is created outside of saidcurrent tasking horizon; calculating a third positive churn is saidreceived actual date is moved out of said current tasking horizon and anaccompanying received estimated date is not in said current taskinghorizon; calculating a second negative churn when said received actualdate is created in or is moved into said current tasking horizon andsaid received estimated date is not in said current tasking horizon; andreceiving language that corresponds to said actual date, wherein a verbdescribes a reason for said actual date and for said churn.
 2. Themethod as claimed in claim 1 further comprising the step of: classifyingsaid received verb as employee dependent.
 3. The method as claimed inclaim 1 further comprising the step of: classifying said received verbas task dependent.
 4. The method as claimed in claim 1 furthercomprising the step of: classifying said received verb as environmentdependent.
 5. The method as claimed in claim 1 further comprising thesteps of; comparing said tasks of said project to previously performedtasks; extracting previously performed task completion data, said dataincluding previous churn data and risk factor data; and computing anexpected task completion time based at least in part on said previouslyperformed task completion data.
 6. The method as claimed in claim 5,wherein said previous risk factor is task dependent.
 7. The method asclaimed in claim 1 further comprising the steps of: comparing said tasksof said project to previously performed tasks; extracting a risk factorassociated with said previously performed tasks; and computing a newrisk factor based at least in part on said extracted risk factor.
 8. Themethod as claimed in claim 1, wherein said actual date comprises anactual start date and an actual stop date.
 9. The method as claimed inclaim 8 wherein said method results in a reduction of said churn. 10.The method as claimed in claim 1 wherein said actual date comprises anactual start date and an actual stop date.
 11. The method as claimed inclaim 1 wherein said received estimated dates comprise an estimatedstart date and an estimated stop date.
 12. The method as claimed inclaim 1 further comprising assigning a risk factor to a second taskwhich is dependent upon a first task.
 13. A method for modeling taskscomprising the steps of: breaking a project into multiple tasks, whereinthere is at least a first task and a second task; selecting a currenttasking horizon from a plurality of potential event horizonsrepresenting a plurality of timeframes; selecting at least two verbs forsaid first task; selecting at least two verbs for said second task;assigning said first task to a first task assignment station; assigningsaid second task to a second task assignment station; receiving apredicted start date and a predicted completion date for said first taskfrom said first task assignment station; receiving a predicted startdate and a predicted completion date for said second task from saidsecond task assignment station; receiving an actual start date and afirst verb for said first task; receiving an actual start date and asecond verb for said second task; computing churn of said first task;computing churn of said second task; computing a risk factor for saidfirst task based on said first verb; and computing a risk factor forsaid second task based on said second verb.
 14. The method as claimed inclaim 13, wherein said second task is dependent on said first task. 15.An apparatus for task modeling comprising: a management module forbreaking a project into tasks, selecting a tasking horizon and forassigning at least two verbs for at least one of said tasks; a taskassignment station for receiving said at least one task and for enteringa predicted start date for said at least one task and for entering anactual start date; wherein said management module and said taskassignment station are operationally connected and wherein saidmanagement module receives said predicted start date and said actualstart date and computes a churn and assigns a risk factor to said taskbased on at least one of said verbs, wherein said at least one verbdescribes a reason for said churn.
 16. The apparatus as claimed in claim15, wherein said apparatus classifies said churn as positive churn ornegative churn.
 17. The apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein saidapparatus is utilized in a churn monitoring program to reduce saidchurn.
 18. A method for modeling tasks comprising the steps of: breakinga project into tasks; selecting a tasking horizon; selecting at leasttwo verbs for at least one of said tasks, wherein each of said verbs istask dependent; receiving a predicted start date and a predicted stopdate for said at least one task; receiving an actual start date and anactual stop date for said at least one task; receiving one of said atleast two verbs that corresponds to said actual start and stop dates,wherein said verb describes at least one reason for said actual startand stop dates; comparing said predicted start and stop dates with saidactual start and stop dates; computing churn of said at least one task;and reviewing said churn in view of said at least one verb, andassigning a risk factor to said task based on said review.
 19. Themethod as claimed in claim 18, wherein said risk factor is equal to apercentage of the time between said predicted start and stop dates. 20.An apparatus for task modeling comprising: a management module forbreaking a project into tasks, selecting a tasking horizon and forassigning at least two verbs for at least one of said tasks; a taskassignment station for receiving said at least one task and for enteringa predicted start and stop date for said at least one task and forentering an actual start and stop date; wherein said management moduleand said task assignment station are operationally connected and whereinsaid management module receives said predicted start and stop dates andsaid actual start and stop dates and computes a churn and assigns a riskfactor to said task based on at least one of said verbs having a reasonassociated therewith used to describe said churn.
 21. A method formodeling tasks comprising the steps of: breaking a project into aplurality of tasks; selecting a tasking horizon; selecting at least twoverbs for at least one of said tasks; receiving a predicted start datefor said at least one task; receiving an actual start date for said atleast one task; receiving one of said at least two verbs thatcorresponds to said actual start date; wherein said verb describes areason for said actual start date; comparing said predicted start datewith said actual start date; computing churn of said at least one task;computing a risk factor based at least in part on at least one of saidcomputed churn and said received verb.